Chemical Waste Management Research Articles

Suggestions for improving the effectiveness of environmental laws and regulations

Environmental ProgressVolume 8, Issue 2 p. M2-M4 Editorial Suggestions for improving the effectiveness of environmental laws and regulations Walter C. Barber, Walter C. Barber Walter C. Barber is Vice President-Environmental Management and Administration of Chemical Waste Management Inc., Oak Brook, IL, responsible for Chemical Waste Management's environmental compliance, safety and health programs. He also directs the Company's Human Resources, Public Affairs and Community Relations activities. He holds Bachelor's and Master's degrees in Civil Engineering from Syracuse University and Catholic University and a Master's degree in Public Administration from Syracuse University. Mr. Barber is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and was Director of the Air Pollution Control Association from 1981–1984.Search for more papers by this author Walter C. Barber, Walter C. Barber Walter C. Barber is Vice President-Environmental Management and Administration of Chemical Waste Management Inc., Oak Brook, IL, responsible for Chemical Waste Management's environmental compliance, safety and health programs. He also directs the Company's Human Resources, Public Affairs and Community Relations activities. He holds Bachelor's and Master's degrees in Civil Engineering from Syracuse University and Catholic University and a Master's degree in Public Administration from Syracuse University. Mr. Barber is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers and was Director of the Air Pollution Control Association from 1981–1984.Search for more papers by this author First published: May 1989 https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.3300080202 AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume8, Issue2May 1989Pages M2-M4 RelatedInformation

Incinerator operations

Chemical Waste Management, Inc. is presently operating an 120 MBtu/h incinerator in Chicago, Illinois, three 14–18 MBtu/h fixed hearth incinerators in Sauget, Illinois, which is across the river from St. Louis. In addition, Chemical Waste Management has completed construction on a 50 MBtu/h rotary kiln incinerator at Sauget and construction is underway for a 150 MBtu/h (158 GJ/h) rotary kiln at Port Arthur, Texas. Based on the experience of operating one of these incinerators and permitting all of them, this paper highlights some of the operational concerns Incinerator operations can be separated into three functions. The blending and feeding of the wastes, the operation of the incinerator and the removal and disposal of ash and other residues. The breakdown of any of these functions means the incinerator is not going to operate. This requires the waste to be understood and properly prepared before feeding to reduce operational upset. The incinerator has to be permitted to its limits and then properly maintained. The ash and residue have to be collected and disposed of in accordance to the new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules and interpretations. This is not as easy as in the past. The people that operate the incinerator have to be trained. However, the incineration operation is not an exact science. The better the experience and training, the better the operation.

Chemical detoxification of dioxin-contaminated wastes using potassium polyethylene glycolate

A chemical destruction technique known as KPEG (potassium polyethylene glycolate) has been used successfully in the states of Montana and Washington to detoxify pentachlorophenol (PCP)-oil and spent solvent waste contaminated with dioxin. A mobile treatment unit, mounted on a 45-foot trailer, was employed to process 8,650 gallons of PCP wood-treating chemical waste at the Montana Pole site in Butte, Montana, in July 1986. This waste was generated as the oily phase of groundwater pumped from 21-foot deep recovery wells; after separation and decantation, approximately 3% PCP in light oil was obtained at the rate of 30 to 50 gallons per day. This site represents an inactive wood-treating facility located on a 20-acre, sloping, abandoned mining site, where contamination by dioxins (CDDs) and bibenzofurans (CDFs) has reached an adjacent creek, including groundwater and surface soil. The PCP-oil waste contained CDD/CDF homologs ranging from 147 ppb of tetra- to 83,923 ppb of octa-congeners and was processed in five batches, each batch comprising approximately 1,400 to 1,850 gallons of waste oil together with the KPEG reagent. The mixture was heated to 150dg and allowed to react for 90 minutes before cooling. The reaction conditions were not optimal, however, and were excessive based on results of earlier Wright State University brehm Laboratory parametric studies, but were considered a “safety measure” in light of the infancy of the process. The treated oil was then pumped from the reactor into a holding tank from which composite samples were removed and sent to the IT Corporation's analytical laboratory in Knoxville, Tennessee. No CDDs or CDFs were detected in the KPEG-treated oil at limits of detection in the parts per trillion (ppt) range. Subsequently, the equipment was transported to the EPA Superfund Western Processing site in Kent, Washington, where it also successfully processed, in September 1986, 7,550 gallons of spent solvent containing an oily waste with a high moisture content (28%) and total chlorides of 20.700 mg/l; the 2,3,7,8-TCDD content was 120 ppb. Bench-scale parametric studies were performed to determine optimum conditions under which to conduct field operations. Field reaction conditions, however, were less than optimal: 115dg for 12 hours. No 2,3,7,8-TCDD was found at a limit of detection of 0.3 ppb in any of the processed batches. Spent KPEG reagent was transported to the Chemical Waste Management PCB-permitted incinerator in Chicago for final disposition. The chemistry usedemploys two basic ingredients Potassium hydroxide and polyethylene glycol, which combine to form the reactive agent, KPEG. KPEG chemically removes chlorine atoms from the CDD molecule to form potassium chloride, thus rendering the dioxin molecule non-toxic. A battery of bioassay tests, conducted ai EPA laboratories in Research Triangle Park. North Carolina, and Duluth. Minnesota, was used to ascertain whether KPEG byproducts (a) bioaccumulated in ussues of organisms; (b) caused cell mutations; or (c) caused immediate harm to fish or mammals. There was no evidence that the byproducts were toxic in any of the tests performed. The KPEG process has therefore successfully destroyed CDDs and CDFs in waste PCP-oil. The processing cost in the Butte, Montana, decontamination field demonstration was less than 10% of the projected, estimated on-site incineration cost and amounted to $212,000. Additional parametric investigations are planned on the contaminated emulsions, groundwater, and soils at Montana Pole. The results of these studies will be reported later this year.

Chemical waste management and disposal

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVArticleNEXTChemical waste management and disposalMargaret-Ann Armour Cite this: J. Chem. Educ. 1988, 65, 3, A64Publication Date (Print):March 1, 1988Publication History Received3 August 2009Published online1 March 1988Published inissue 1 March 1988https://doi.org/10.1021/ed065pA64RIGHTS & PERMISSIONSArticle Views830Altmetric-Citations10LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InReddit PDF (5 MB) Get e-Alerts Get e-Alerts

Chemical Manufacturers Association 1984 Hazardous Waste Survey

This paper discusses the Chemical Manufacturers Association's 1984 survey of the chemical industry's hazardous waste management practices. The survey data include a breakdown of how the industry's hazardous wastes are managed, detailing generation, treatment and disposal, and cover 725 plants in 81 companies. The 1984 survey is the third CM A hazardous waste survey, and the paper discusses resultant waste treatment trends from 1981- 1984, the period covered by previous surveys. A total of 278.5 million tons of hazardous waste was treated and disposed by survey respondents. Of this, 276.8 million tons was hazardous wastewater and 1.7 million tons was solid hazardous waste. The survey solid hazardous waste total was projected to the entire industry (Standard Industrial Code 2800) and is estimated at 6.9 million tons. The survey showed continued decreasing trends in hazardous waste generation in the chemical industry. It demonstrated changes in hazardous waste management practices, with decreased use of land...

2nd international symposium on operating European hazardous (Chemical) waste management facilities, Odense, Denmark, September 11–14, 1984

2nd international symposium on operating European hazardous (Chemical) waste management facilities, Odense, Denmark, September 11–14, 1984

2nd International Symposium on Operating European Hazardous (Chemical) Waste Management Facilities: Odense, Denmark 11–14 September 1984

2nd International Symposium on Operating European Hazardous (Chemical) Waste Management Facilities: Odense, Denmark 11–14 September 1984

Nuclear and chemical waste management

Nuclear and chemical waste management

Chemical Safety in Clinical Laboratories

Chemical safety topics that are widely applicable in clinical laboratory practice are reviewed, with emphasis on flammable, corrosive, poisonous and pressurized chemical hazards. The United Nations hazards classes are discussed, and precautionary labeling that should be used to identify these classes and their members is described. Fire, fire safety, corrosives, prevention of chemical burns of eyes and skin, protection from and detection of poisons, the hazards of compressed gases and cryogenic liquids, safe storage of incompatible chemicals, and management and disposal of hazardous and chemical wastes in compliance with emergent enforcement of the Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) are among the topics discussed. Selected references that have been used in teaching chemical safety in the chemical industry and allied products and processes industries are also included.